Endovascular thrombectomy with or without systemic thrombolysis?

OBJECTIVES: Current recommendations advocate that pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) should first be offered to all eligible patients with emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) before an endovascular thrombectomy (ET) procedure. However, there are observational data that question the safety and efficacy of IVT pretreatment in patients with ELVO. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of the included subgroups from ET randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the comparative efficacy between direct ET without IVT pretreatment and bridging therapy (IVT and ET) in patients with ELVO. RESULTS: We included a total of seven RCTs, including 1764 patients with ELVO (52.8% men). Patients receiving bridging therapy (IVT followed by ET) had lower rates (p = 0.041) of 90-day death/severe dependency (modified Rankin Scale-score of 5-6; 19.0%, 95% CI: 14.1-25.1%) compared with patients receiving only ET (31.0%, 95% CI: 21.2-42.9%). Moreover, patients receiving IVT and ET had a nonsignificant (p = 0.389) trend towards higher 90-day functional independence rates (51.4%, 95% CI: 42.5-60.1%) compared with patients undergoing only ET (41.7%, 95% CI: 24.1-61.7%). Finally, shift-analysis uncovered a nonsignificant trend towards functional improvement at 90 days for bridging therapy over ET (cOR = 1.28, 95% CI: 0.91-1.89; p = 0.155). It should be noted that patients included in the present meta-analysis were not randomized to receive IVT, and thus the two groups (bridging therapy versus ET monotherapy) may differ in terms of baseline characteristics and, in particular, in terms of onset to groin puncture time and thus the risk of confounding bias cannot be ruled out. CONCLUSION: Despite the limitations and the risk of confounding bias, our findings contradict the recent notion regarding potential equality between ET and bridging therapy in ELVO patients and suggest that IVT and ET are complementary therapies that should be pursued in a parallel and noncompeting fashion.

Ancillary approaches to plasminogen activators.

Acute ischemic stroke develops from an interruption in focal cerebral blood flow. In many cases, it is caused by an acute thromboembolism. Although systemic fibrinolytic therapy for acute ischemic stroke has been a significant breakthrough in the management of this disease, additional agents and methods that could improve or restore cerebral flow are necessary. Similarly to findings in acute myocardial infarction, combination pharmacotherapy has the potential to improve current thrombolytic treatment in acute ischemic stroke. In recent years, research efforts were directed toward various combination therapy with pharmacological and nonpharmacological methods. Several trials tested tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) in combination with antiplateletes and anticoagulants. Combination of t-PA with nonpharmacological agents included sonothrombolysis (amplifying the thrombolytic effect), laser (neuro-recovery), hypothermia (cytoprotection and decreasing brain swelling), and blood flow augmentation (increasing residual flow and recruitment of collateral vessels). This paper will review ongoing clinical trials and safety of these promising combinatory treatments.

Adjunctive and alternative approaches to current reperfusion therapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Current ischemic stroke reperfusion therapy consists of intravenous thrombolysis given in eligible patients after review of a noncontrast CT scan and a time-based window of opportunity. Rapid clot lysis has a strong association with clinical improvement but remains incomplete in many patients. This review appraises novel adjunctive or alternative approaches to current reperfusion strategies being tested in all trial phases. Summary of Review- Alternative approaches to current reperfusion therapy can be separated into 4 main categories: (1) combinatory approaches with other drugs or devices; (2) novel systemic thrombolytic agents; (3) endovascular medical or mechanical reperfusion treatments; and (4) noninvasive or minimally invasive methods to augment cerebral blood flow and alleviate intracranial blood flow steal. CONCLUSIONS: Reperfusion treatments must be provided as fast as possible in patients most likely to benefit. Patients who fail to rapidly reperfuse may benefit from other strategies that maintain collateral flow or protect tissue at risk.